![](bg2.png)
business-IT alignment. As mentioned earlier EA is
being adopted by organizations for multiple
purposes, thus we have to define the meaning of the
term ‘Enterprise Architecture’ and what could be the
possible adoptions of EA in an organization. We
refer to these set of adoptions as identifying the
‘context of EA’. A summary of the literature review
is presented below.
EA Benefits: Two studies (Niemi, 2006) and
(Tamm, 2011) provide a comprehensive review of
the literature on Enterprise Architecture benefits and
provide models for categorizing EA benefits. These
studies show that the benefits of EA vary depending
on the definition of EA and how it is used. This
reflects the importance of defining the context of EA
in order to clearly understand and gauge the benefits
of EA in the organization.
EA Quality and Maturity Model: Traditionally EA
research was more focused on the development and
modelling of EA, but over time the quality aspects
of EA have also gained attention. This has primarily
driven the focus towards using EA maturity models
for the evolution and improvement of EA.
(Schekkerman, 2004) also provides an EA scorecard
to measure and monitor the status and quality of
various EA elements. (Reekum, 2006) suggests
metrics for measuring quality of EA. But we contend
that quality is only one set of possible measurements
for EA. Thus, the perspective of measurement also
plays an important role in determining the metrics
for measuring EA.
EA Metrics: Identifying quantifiable measures for
EA is a challenging task as it is not simple to express
the real value of EA in technical oriented metrics
(Schelp, 2007). Although (Schelp, 2007) provides a
comprehensive model for identifying EA metrics, it
does not provide a structured way of establishing the
context of EA. (Velitchkov, 2009) and
(Vasconcelos, 2007) both provide a suggestive list
of EA metrics but only from the scope of IT. We
believe that “empirical approaches are not suitable to
define a general metric” for EA, as the adoption of
EA is context driven.
EA Frameworks: None of the EA frameworks
provide any specific information on EA metrics.
TOGAF 9 only suggests that EA measurement
criterion can be developed much like the Capability
Maturity Model (CMM). (Zachman, 2001) suggests
that organizations should invest in architecture to
enable themselves for alignment, integration, change
and mass customization. Long-standing EA
frameworks such as FEAF and MODAF define their
own EA assessment models but they are very
specific to their individual requirements and thus
very specific to their context.
Based on the literature study it is derived that it
is difficult and unsuitable to define a fixed set of
metrics for EA as its implementation depends on the
organization and stakeholder requirements. Thus,
this reflects the value of understanding and defining
the context of EA for driving EA measurement.
3 WHY IS CONTEXT REQUIRED
Context defines the interrelated conditions in which
something exists or occurs. Organizational
endeavours operate under multiple interrelated
conditions. These conditions may change over time.
Without a thorough understanding of such
conditions and the changes thereof, organizations
would operate sub-optimally. Same is true for
Enterprise Architecture endeavours. Although,
before defining the context for EA, it is important to
define EA itself.
EA as a term consists of two words; Enterprise
and Architecture. Oxford dictionary defines
‘Enterprise’ as ‘a unit of economic organization or
activity’ and ‘Architecture’ as ‘a unifying or
coherent form or structure’.
Thus, ‘Enterprise Architecture’ refers to ‘a
coherent structure of a unit of economic
organization’. Simply put EA refers to the
description of an enterprise in terms of its parts, their
form and their logical structure, where the enterprise
could be the entire organization or a unit of the
organization (later referred to as domain in this
paper). The parts mentioned above are anything and
everything that constitutes the enterprise and their
form represents their essential nature.
By the explanation given above, EA should
ideally deal with anything and everything related to
the enterprise which includes apart from other things
organizational culture, management styles and
people. Industrial application of EA through various
frameworks and methodologies do not specifically
cover these aspects. Thus the current
implementations of EA and its measurement are
limited. Most organizations end up defining EA
metrics based on benefits such as integration,
alignment, agility which are difficult to quantify and
even more difficult to justify.
Additionally, the implementation of EA varies
from one organization to another and largely
depends on some conditions which we refer to as the
context. Thus, understanding and defining the
context provides the right setting for successful
implementation of EA in an organization. This in
ICEIS2012-14thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
250